“Acosta’s press conference didn’t help him with ‘inaccurate,’ ‘twisted’ statements“
I would love to hear an unvarnished, impartial explanation of why Acosta gave Epstein that sweetheart deal. I’m going to assume that Acosta was an honest man and didn’t receive a bribe or anything of that nature. Given that assumption, why did he cut that outrageous deal in general, and especially why did he cut it without informing the outraged victims. (A Florida judge later ruled that illegal).
In case you didn’t realize it, Epstein accepted a 13-month sentence in a private cell block of a local jail, which allowed him to be free for 12 hours per day. Basically, he was sentenced to sleep in an uncomfortable bed for 13 months, whereas a full prosecution could have landed him in a federal prison for life. And that could have been very hard time. The scuttlebutt is that guys who molest underage girls are not popular in prison.
In fact, Epstein never faced any federal charges at all. Acosta dropped them all, so Epstein only had to plead guilty to state prostitution charges with the cozy jail arrangement described above. (He also had to pay some restitution, and agree to register as a sex offender.)
One of the most shocking elements of the deal, per the Miami Herald report, was that it protected four of Epstein’s accomplices from facing federal prosecution and granted immunity to “any potential co-conspirators.”
How did Epstein get this deal from Acosta? Well, Mark Twain once wrote that many small children had been lured to their financial ruin by the promise of the first five dollar gold piece their swindler found floating down a river on a brick. (Twain called this “an eminently plausible fiction”.) Perhaps Acosta was lured by the promise of becoming Labor Secretary if Donald Trump was ever elected President. While less plausible than the gold piece offer, it actually DID come true.